W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-bugzilla@w3.org > July 2012

[Bug 18436] Re-add support for skew()

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 23:27:33 +0000
Message-Id: <E1SwLqf-0002Rd-Ky@jessica.w3.org>
To: public-css-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18436

--- Comment #7 from Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com> 2012-07-31 23:27:33 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > (In reply to comment #4)
> > > (In reply to comment #3)
> > > > (In reply to comment #1)
> > > > > Did IE 10 keep skew(x, y) while also unprefixing?
> > > > 
> > > > Tested it on last IE 10 public preview and it is supported there.
> > > 
> > > Indeed; it was supported in IE9 and remains supported in unprefixed IE10. We
> > > have no plans to remove support at this time.
> > 
> > If we add skew() again, we won't be able to remove it again. I don't have
> > strong feeling on adding it again, but still don't think that this function
> > makes sense. I don't think that edge still supports skew() in the latest
> > version, but will check tomorrow.
> 
> If existing content depends on it to a point where implementations suffer from
> not supporting it then we're not able to remove it *today*. If by 'it doesn't
> make sense' you mean 'it's redundant' then sure; I don't understand what real
> harm there is in that though. It's unfortunate but there are worse problems.
It is not in the spec. It was removed several months ago, even before IE went
to feature freeze I guess. And redundant is not quite correct. It is maybe used
in a redundant way, but can do things that are hard to describe from a
graphical point of view: skew(alpha, beta).

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 31 July 2012 23:27:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 31 July 2012 23:27:35 GMT